DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Courts and Australian National Identity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Courts and Australian National Identity CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: FEDERAL JURISDICTION AND RESHAPING INSTITUTIONS FEDERAL COURTS AND AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY T HE HON JUSTICE SUSAN KENNY* The history of Australian federal courts, from the creation of the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration in 1904 until now, is part of the broader history of how Australians have come to see themselves and their relationship to courts as institutions of an evolving Australian government. Although unremarked in current historical studies about Australian national identity, significant changes in the conception of the Australian court system occurred in parallel with fundamental shifts in the creation, formulation and discernment of national identity. This article considers the history of the Australian federal courts alongside the processes of the formation of Australian national identity, as explored by Curran and Ward. This approach reveals much about the strengths and weaknesses of the federal court system today. CONTENTS I Introduction .............................................................................................................. 997 II The Curran and Ward Analysis .............................................................................. 998 III The Courts at Federation ...................................................................................... 1000 IV Constitutional and Post-Constitutional Federal Arrangements for Courts . 1001 V Developing a Framework for Federal Jurisdiction after 1918 ......................... 1005 VI The Postwar Harbingers of Change ..................................................................... 1008 VII Emerging Nationalism and the Federal Courts ................................................. 1009 VIII Federal Courts as Integral to the Federal Polity ................................................ 1015 IX Three Tiers of Federal Justice ............................................................................... 1018 X Conclusion: Federal Courts and Federal Identity ............................................. 1020 * BA (Hons), LLB (Hons) (Melb), DPhil (Oxf); Justice of the Federal Court of Australia. The author acknowledges and thanks Hollie Kerwin for her invaluable assistance in the prepara- tion of this article. 996 2015] Federal Courts and Australian National Identity 997 I INTRODUCTION In an article published in the Law Quarterly Review in 1935, the Hon Owen Dixon, then a Justice of the High Court of Australia, wrote: But neither from the point of view of juristic principle nor from that of the practical and efficient administration of justice can the division of the Courts into state and federal be regarded as sound.1 In 1963, less than 30 years later, Mr E G Whitlam QC, then Deputy Leader of the Opposition, declared: Judges who are called on to interpret and apply statutes should be appointed by governments responsible to the parliaments which passed those statutes. On this basic principle alone one should agree … that federal laws should be ap- plied and interpreted by judges appointed by the federal government.2 It would be a mistake to conceive of the creation of the Federal Court of Australia as merely a pragmatic solution to rationalise the jurisdiction of the existing federal courts, although proponents commonly cited functional considerations in favour of its establishment. Instead, the history of this and the other federal Australian courts is part of a broader history of how Austral- ians have come to see themselves and their relationship to courts as institu- tions of an evolving Australian government. In other words, the history of Australian federal courts is part of the history of Australian national identity. Their twin development throughout the later 20th and 21st centuries reveals points of shared interaction and influence which deserve attention. In the post-Imperial age, societies, once expressly defined by their mem- bership of the British Empire, have undeniably created new and sometimes distinct identities. At the same time, fading imperialism has required reform, sometimes significant, of the structures and institutions of government inherited from and previously overseen by the Empire. Australian historians have debated when, where, why and how Australian national identity was created, formulated or discerned; and the debate continues.3 The fundamental 1 Justice Owen Dixon, ‘The Law and the Constitution’ (1935) 51 Law Quarterly Review 590, 606. 2 M H Byers and P B Toose, ‘The Necessity for a New Federal Court (A Survey of the Federal Court System in Australia)’ (1963) 36 Australian Law Journal 308, 327. The comments of Mr Whitlam are also recorded here. 3 See, for example, the contributions of Christopher Waters, James Curran, Marilyn Lake, Sharon Crozier-De Rosa, David Lowe and Frank Bongiorno in Symposium, ‘Nationalism and Transnationalism in Australian Historical Writing’ (2013) 10(3) History Australia 7. 998 Melbourne University Law Review [Vol 38:996 and parallel changes that have occurred in the conception of the Australian court system have, however, gone unremarked in current historical studies of Australian national identity. This omission should be redressed. This article examines the history of the creation of Australian federal courts in relation to Curran and Ward’s analysis of Australian national identity as an as yet unresolved response to the receding ties to the British Empire.4 It is not the purpose of the article to defend their analysis as an accurate description of Australian social, cultural and political life. Rather, the article seeks to explore the history of the federal courts alongside the broader, and sometimes hesitant, processes of national identity formation, which Curran and Ward detail. Ultimately this approach reveals the nature, strengths and weaknesses of the federal court system as it exists today. The article maintains that the Curran and Ward analysis is helpful insofar as it elucidates the nature and foundations of the relationship between the federal courts and the other branches of federal government. The article argues that, over the past 20 years, the federal courts have gained acceptance as an integral part of Australian federal government and that they now perform significantly different roles in the federal polity from those generally contemplated before the 1960s. Notwithstanding Mortensen’s view that arguments about nationhood and the federal polity to justify the creation of the Federal Court were and remain merely ‘cosmetic’ and fail to reflect reality,5 the article maintains that this acceptance of ‘federal courts’ as an important part of ‘federal government’ is an aspect of the Australian search for identity. Further, attention to the new roles of federal courts in the post- Imperial age discloses their more complex, nuanced relationships with the federal government and the Australian community. Navigating these relation- ships successfully requires a steady awareness of, and respect for, the different responsibilities of the three branches of government. II THE CURRAN AND WARD ANALYSIS In The Unknown Nation: Australia after Empire, Curran and Ward argue that the intensified interest in national identity evident amongst Australians from the early 1960s to the 1980s was ‘a response to the relatively sudden collapse 4 James Curran and Stuart Ward, The Unknown Nation: Australia after Empire (Melbourne University Press, 2010). 5 Reid Mortensen, ‘Autochthonous Essential: State Courts and a Cooperative National Scheme of Civil Jurisdiction’ (2003) 22 University of Tasmania Law Review 109, 143. 2015] Federal Courts and Australian National Identity 999 of Britishness’ as an accepted standard for civil allegiance.6 They com- ment that [f]rom the mid-1960s, with a dwindling material basis for imperial sentiment, Australians were confronted with the task of remaking their nation in the wake of empire. It was a problem that touched every aspect of Australian life where identifiably ‘British’ ideas, symbols, motifs, precepts and practices demanded remodelling.7 As they observe, in 1968, journalist Donald Horne introduced the expression ‘new nationalism’ to describe Prime Minister Gorton’s political style;8 and the term was rapidly adapted to signify what Serle referred to as a ‘surge of national consciousness and idealism’.9 At around the same time, Manning Clark announced that ‘the years of unleavened bread were over’.10 Curran and Ward contend, however, that ‘the underlying rationale of the new nationalism was neither as self-assured, coherent nor universally welcomed as is generally assumed’ and ‘this era of national renewal ultimately failed to produce a viable solution to the problem of post-imperial nation- hood’.11 In consequence, Australians continue to be uncertain about their national identity and to doubt national institutions.12 Having regard to these contentions, it is instructive, first, to consider the British Imperial nature of Australian courts prior to Federation and these courts’ reception of federal jurisdiction pursuant to the Constitution and the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) (‘Judiciary Act’). It is useful to consider the circum- stances that led to the establishment of a small number of federal courts, generally with subject-specific jurisdictions, before examining the arguments in the 1960s for the creation of a family court and, more particularly, a federal court of more expansive jurisdiction. What happened thereafter is significant in light of the Curran and Ward thesis that the search for Australian
Load more

Recommended publications
  • South Australian Mps
    Contacts– South Australian MPs Key People Hon Steven Marshall - Premier Dunstan Liberal Telephone: 08 8363 9111 OR 8463 3166 Facsimile: 8463 3168 Postal Address: Unit 2 90-94 The Parade, NORWOOD SA 5067 Email: [email protected] Hon Vickie Chapman – Deputy Premier Bragg Liberal Telephone: 8207 1723 OR 08 8332 4799 Facsimile: 08 8364 2173 Postal Address: 357 Greenhill Road, TOORAK GARDENS SA 5065 Email: [email protected] Hon Stephen Knoll, Minister for Planning, Transport Schubert Liberal and Infrastructure Telephone: 08 8563 3636 Facsimile: 08 8563 0190 Postal Address: 129A Murray Street, TANUNDA SA 5352 Email: [email protected] Hon Rob Lucas – Treasurer Legislative Liberal Telephone: 8 8237 9100 Council Facsimile: 8226 1896 Postal Address: Level 8, State Administration Centre, North Terrace Adelaide SA 5000 Email: [email protected] Mr Peter Malinauskas – Leader of the Opposition Croydon Labor Telephone: 08 8346 2462 Facsimile: 08 8346 5471 Postal Address: 488 Port Road, WELLAND SA 5007 Email: [email protected] Dr Susan Close – Deputy Leader of the Opposition Port Adelaide Labor Telephone: 08 8241 0300 Facsimile: 08 8241 0400 Postal Address: 1/111 Lipson Street, PORT ADELAIDE SA 5015 Email: [email protected] Hon Tony Piccolo, Shadow Minister for Planning, Light Labor Housing and Urban Develpoment Telephone: 08 8522 2878 Facsimile: 08 8523 1392 Postal Address: 148 Murray Street, GAWLER SA 5118 Email: [email protected] Contacts– South Australian MPs Your MP’s
    [Show full text]
  • From Mabo to Yorta Yorta: Native Title Law in Australia
    Washington University Journal of Law & Policy Volume 19 Access to Justice: The Social Responsibility of Lawyers | Contemporary and Comparative Perspectives on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples January 2005 From Mabo to Yorta Yorta: Native Title Law in Australia Lisa Strelein Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy Part of the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation Lisa Strelein, From Mabo to Yorta Yorta: Native Title Law in Australia, 19 WASH. U. J. L. & POL’Y 225 (2005), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/vol19/iss1/14 This Rights of Indigenous Peoples - Essay is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Journal of Law & Policy by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. From Mabo to Yorta Yorta: Native Title Law in Australia Dr. Lisa Strelein* INTRODUCTION In more than a decade since Mabo v. Queensland II’s1 recognition of Indigenous peoples’ rights to their traditional lands, the jurisprudence of native title has undergone significant development. The High Court of Australia decisions in Ward2 and Yorta Yorta3 in 2002 sought to clarify the nature of native title and its place within Australian property law, and within the legal system more generally. Since these decisions, lower courts have had time to apply them to native title issues across the country. This Article briefly examines the history of the doctrine of discovery in Australia as a background to the delayed recognition of Indigenous rights in lands and resources.
    [Show full text]
  • “An Audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1854-2017
    2018 V “An audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1854-2017 Mark McKenna Article: “An audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1954-2017 “An audience with the Queen”: Indigenous Australians and the Crown, 1954- 2017 Mark McKenna Abstract: This article is the first substantial examination of the more recent historical relationship between Indigenous Australians and the Crown. While the earlier tradition of perceiving the Queen as benefactress has survived in Indigenous communities, it now co- exists with more critical and antagonistic views. After the High Court’s Mabo decision (1992), the passage of the Native Title Act (1993), and the federal government’s Apology to the Stolen Generations (2008), it is clear that the only avenues for seriously redressing Indigenous grievances lie within the courts and parliaments of Australia. The Australian monarch—either as a supportive voice, or as a vehicle for highlighting the failure of Australian governments— no longer holds any substantial political utility for Indigenous Australians. Monarchy has become largely irrelevant to the fate of future Indigenous claims for political and social justice. Keywords: monarchy, republic, Indigenous Australia n October 1999, a delegation of Indigenous leaders from Australia visited Queen Elizabeth II at Buckingham Palace. The ‘audience,’ which lasted for little more than an hour and was widely reported in the British and Australian press, was claimed to Ibe the first granted to Indigenous Australians by a reigning British monarch since 24 May 1793, when Bennelong, who had been captured by Governor Arthur Phillip in Sydney and later sailed with him to England, was presented to King George III.1 The 206-year hiatus was telling for more than one reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Making a Difference 40 Years of the Commonwealth Ombudsman © Commonwealth of Australia, Represented by the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, 2017
    Making a difference 40 years of the Commonwealth Ombudsman © Commonwealth of Australia, represented by the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, 2017. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 or unless otherwise expressly indicated all other rights are reserved. Requests for further authorisation should be sent to [email protected] While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, neither the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, nor any of the contributors, participating in its production in any capacity, shall have liability to any person or entity with respect to any liability, loss or damage caused or alleged to be caused, directly or indirectly, by the information contained in, or omitted from, this book. Unless otherwise specified, images in the book were sourced from the Ombudsman’s office collection – many were drawn from annual reports. The Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman thanks the copyright owners who have given permission to have their photographs used. Every effort has been made to identify copyright and locate owners to obtain permission. Published by the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, 2017. TITLE: Making a Difference – 40 years of the Commonwealth Ombudsman ISBN: 978-0-9875235-4-9 Author: Carmel Meiklejohn Designer: David Foira Publisher: Bytes ‘n Colours, Canberra 40 years Making a difference The Office of the Commonwealth But the core values set from the very beginning of the office – Ombudsman celebrates its independence, integrity, accessibility and professionalism – remain 40th anniversary in 2017. the same and will continue to guide the office into its fifth decade. Part of the ‘new administrative law’ On behalf of Commonwealth Ombudsmen past and present, I reforms of the 1970s and early 1980s, would like to thank the staff of the office over the past 40 years the Ombudsman was established whose leadership, dedication and enthusiasm have ensured that to provide an avenue for citizens to the office has and is always making a difference.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing the Dynamics of Party Leadership Survival in Britain and Australia: Brown, Rudd and Gillard
    This is a repository copy of Comparing the dynamics of party leadership survival in Britain and Australia: Brown, Rudd and Gillard. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/82697/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Heppell, T and Bennister, M (2015) Comparing the dynamics of party leadership survival in Britain and Australia: Brown, Rudd and Gillard. Government and Opposition, FirstV. 1 - 26. ISSN 1477-7053 https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2014.31 Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Comparing the Dynamics of Party Leadership Survival in Britain and Australia: Brown, Rudd and Gillard Abstract This article examines the interaction between the respective party structures of the Australian Labor Party and the British Labour Party as a means of assessing the strategic options facing aspiring challengers for the party leadership.
    [Show full text]
  • State Revival the Role of the States in Australia’S COVID-19 Response and Beyond
    State revival The role of the states in Australia’s COVID-19 response and beyond Australia’s states and territories have taken the lead in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, supported by constitutional powers and popular mandates. With the states newly emboldened, further action on climate change, changes to federal–state financial arrangements and reform of National Cabinet could all be on the agenda. Discussion paper Bill Browne July 2021 ABOUT THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE The Australia Institute is an independent public policy think tank based in Canberra. It is funded by donations from philanthropic trusts and individuals and commissioned research. We barrack for ideas, not political parties or candidates. Since its launch in 1994, the Institute has carried out highly influential research on a broad range of economic, social and environmental issues. OUR PHILOSOPHY As we begin the 21st century, new dilemmas confront our society and our planet. Unprecedented levels of consumption co-exist with extreme poverty. Through new technology we are more connected than we have ever been, yet civic engagement is declining. Environmental neglect continues despite heightened ecological awareness. A better balance is urgently needed. The Australia Institute’s directors, staff and supporters represent a broad range of views and priorities. What unites us is a belief that through a combination of research and creativity we can promote new solutions and ways of thinking. OUR PURPOSE – ‘RESEARCH THAT MATTERS’ The Institute publishes research that contributes to a more just, sustainable and peaceful society. Our goal is to gather, interpret and communicate evidence in order to both diagnose the problems we face and propose new solutions to tackle them.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter One: the Background and Roles of Shadow Cabinet
    Chapter one: the background and roles of Shadow Cabinet As with most other components of the Australian political system, Shadow Cabinet evolved from an informal process in the British Parliament. From the mid-nineteenth century in Britain, a distinct and organised opposition began to emerge; a leadership group to coordinate its strategy soon followed.1 In the latter half of that century, the Shadow Cabinet became a recognised entity within British politics, though British academic D.R. Turner notes that ‘its use was still limited and its full potential unrecognised’.2 Over time, the Shadow Cabinet slowly solidified its position in the British system, marked most notably in 1937, when the position of Leader of the Opposition began to carry a salary.3 This same development, however, had already taken place in Australia, 17 years earlier, following an initiative of Prime Minister Billy Hughes.4 As academic, Ian Ward notes, this remains the only formal recognition of Shadow Cabinet in Australia; shadow ministers’ salaries are set at the same rate as backbenchers, but they are usually given an allowance—around one-fifth of that allocated to ministers—for researchers and other staff.5 In this chapter, I briefly examine the evolution of the British Shadow Cabinet and how that has impacted the Australian equivalent. I then examine the three roles most commonly ascribed to the British Shadow Cabinet and discuss the extent to which they are evident in the modern Australian Shadow Cabinet. These roles are: organising the Opposition, providing an alternative government and serving as a training ground for future ministers.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Titles and Forms of Address for Dignitaries
    OFFICIAL A GUIDE TO TITLES AND FORMS OF ADDRESS FOR DIGNITARIES How referred to in Title Address block in correspondence Salutation person Governor-General His Excellency General the Honourable David Hurley AC DSC (Retd) Your Excellency or Initially ‘Your Excellency’ Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia Dear Governor-General thereafter ‘Sir’ Contact: Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia Governor His Excellency The Honourable Hieu Van Le AC Your Excellency At first meeting ‘Your Governor of South Australia Excellency’ thereafter Contact: Governor of South Australia ‘Sir’ Premier The Honourable Steven Marshall MP Dear Premier Premier Premier of South Australia Contact: Premier of South Australia Prime Minister The Honourable Scott Morrison MP Dear Prime Minister Prime Minister or Prime Minister of Australia Mr Morrison Contact: Prime Minister of Australia Lieutenant Governor Professor Brenda Wilson AM Dear Professor Wilson Professor Wilson Lieutenant Governor of South Australia Contact: Lieutenant Governor of South Australia Chief Justice The Honourable Chief Justice Chris Kourakis Dear Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice of South Australia Contact: Chief Justice of South Australia Government Ministers The Honourable (Dr if required) (first name) (surname) MP or MLC Dear Minister Minister or Minister Minister for xxx (surname) Contact: State Cabinet Ministers If addressing a Minister in their electorate office Dear Minister Minister or Minister The Honourable (Dr if required) (first name) (surname) MP or
    [Show full text]
  • The Australian Legal System Contact Points Where Law Comes from Libraries Griffith University
    The Australian Legal System Contact Points Where Law Comes From Libraries Griffith University https://www.griffith.edu.au/library Queensland University of Technology Law Library https://www.qut.edu.au/law/about/qut–law–library Supreme Court Library http://www.sclqld.org.au/ University of Queensland Walter Harrison Law Library https://web.library.uq.edu.au/locations-hours/law-library-walter-harrison-library James Cook University University Library https://www.jcu.edu.au/library © 2016 Caxton Legal Centre Inc. queenslandlawhandbook.org.au 1 The Court System Commonwealth Administrative Appeals Tribunal http://www.aat.gov.au/ Family Court of Australia http://www.familycourt.gov.au//wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/home Federal Court of Australia http://www.fedcourt.gov.au/ Federal Circuit Court of Australia http://www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au//wps/wcm/connect/fccweb/home High Court of Australia http://www.hcourt.gov.au/ Queensland All Queensland state courts are listed on the Queensland courts website. http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/courts Department of Justice and Attorney-General http://www.justice.qld.gov.au/ Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal http://www.qcat.qld.gov.au/ Self-representation Court Network http://www.courtnetwork.com.au/Whatcouldwedoforyou.aspx QPILCH Self Representation Service www.qpilch.org.au Self-Represented Litigants Service (SRLS) http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/representing-yourself-in-court/advice-and-support Mediation services Australian Commercial Disputes Centre https://disputescentre.com.au/ Relationships Australia Queensland http://www.raq.org.au Dispute Resolution Centres https://www.qld.gov.au/law/legal-mediation-and-justice-of-the-peace/setting-disputes-out-of- court/dispute-resolution-centres/ Legal Aid Queensland http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au © 2016 Caxton Legal Centre Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents Chronology of Events
    Table of Contents Chronology of Events .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 History- 1788 to 1900 .............................................................................................................................................. 5 Plenary ‘sovereign’ Parliaments ........................................................................................................................................ 5 History- Towards Federation- 1880 to 1990 ................................................................................................... 6 Federation (1901)...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (Imp) ...................................................................................... 7 Post Federation- 1901 to 1986 (Parliamentary Sovereignty) ................................................................... 8 ‘Balfour Declaration 1926’ [1.3.9E] .................................................................................................................................. 8 Statute of Westminster 1931 (UK) [1.3.11E] ................................................................................................................ 8 The Australia Acts ..................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 12. Breach of Confidence Actions for Misuse of Private Information
    12. Breach of confidence actions for misuse of private information Contents Summary 179 The likely future development of the action for breach of confidence 180 Damages for emotional distress in action for breach of confidence 181 Injunctions, privacy and the public interest 185 Injunctions in defamation and breach of confidence 188 Injunctions to restrain disclosure of private information 190 Summary 12.1 This chapter makes two proposals dealing with existing protections of privacy at common law and with a view to the likely development of the common law if a statutory cause of action is not enacted.1 12.2 In addition to and separate from the detailed legal design of a statutory cause of action for serious invasion of privacy, the Terms of Reference require the ALRC to make recommendations as to other legal remedies to redress serious invasions of privacy and as to innovative ways in which the law may reduce serious invasions of privacy. 12.3 The Terms of Reference also direct the ALRC to make recommendations as to the necessity of balancing the value of privacy with other fundamental values including freedom of expression and open justice. 12.4 The first proposal is intended to redress uncertainty in the community as to whether Australian law provides a remedy for emotional distress suffered as a result of a breach of privacy which takes the form of the disclosure or misuse of private 1 In this chapter, the ALRC does not consider the possible development at common law of a new or separate tort for harassment or intrusion into seclusion, because it considers that, in the absence of a statutory cause of action for serious invasion of privacy, a statutory action for protection against harassment is the more appropriate way for the law to be developed: see Ch 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Guide to Legal Citation, Third Edition
    AUSTRALIAN GUIDE TO LEGAL AUSTRALIAN CITATION AUST GUIDE TO LEGAL CITA AUSTRALIAN GUIDE TO TO LEGAL CITATION AUSTRALIAN GUIDE TO LEGALA CITUSTRATION ALIAN Third Edition GUIDE TO LEGAL CITATION AGLC3 - Front Cover 4 (MJ) - CS4.indd 1 21/04/2010 12:32:24 PM AUSTRALIAN GUIDE TO LEGAL CITATION Third Edition Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc in collaboration with Melbourne Journal of International Law Inc Melbourne 2010 Published and distributed by the Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc in collaboration with the Melbourne Journal of International Law Inc National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Australian guide to legal citation / Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc., Melbourne Journal of International Law Inc. 3rd ed. ISBN 9780646527390 (pbk.). Bibliography. Includes index. Citation of legal authorities - Australia - Handbooks, manuals, etc. Melbourne University Law Review Association Melbourne Journal of International Law 808.06634 First edition 1998 Second edition 2002 Third edition 2010 Reprinted 2010, 2011 (with minor corrections), 2012 (with minor corrections) Published by: Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc Reg No A0017345F · ABN 21 447 204 764 Melbourne University Law Review Telephone: (+61 3) 8344 6593 Melbourne Law School Facsimile: (+61 3) 9347 8087 The University of Melbourne Email: <[email protected]> Victoria 3010 Australia Internet: <http://www.law.unimelb.edu.au/mulr> Melbourne Journal of International Law Inc Reg No A0046334D · ABN 86 930 725 641 Melbourne Journal of International Law Telephone: (+61 3) 8344 7913 Melbourne Law School Facsimile: (+61 3) 8344 9774 The University of Melbourne Email: <[email protected]> Victoria 3010 Australia Internet: <http://www.law.unimelb.edu.au/mjil> © 2010 Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc and Melbourne Journal of International Law Inc.
    [Show full text]